The sixth summit of the BRICS group of large emerging economies in Fortaleza, Brazil, is a curtain-raiser to a brave new world where leading developing countries finally challenge the iniquitous international system.

Since the 1970s, poorer nations have articulated visions of a New
International Economic Order (NIEO) entailing non-exploitative
interactions between the Global North and the Global South. But
it is only now, with the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and
South Africa) all set to launch ambitious new economic
institutions, that we are walking the talk.

Among the host of agenda items on the menu at Fortaleza, the most
anticipated is the launch of the New Development Bank (NDB), a
fresh multilateral lending organization dedicated to financing
infrastructure and sustainable growth inside BRICS countries and
beyond. With an initial seed capital of $50 billion derived from
equal contributions of $10 billion from each BRICS member, this
bank could scale up to a total lending chest of $100 billion. For
context, the Western-dominated World Bank has a capital of $223
billion.

By keeping open the prospect of other UN members making
contributions to the capital base of the NDB, BRICS nations have
laid the platform for eventually overtaking the World Bank and
becoming the world’s largest multilateral donor. The inclusive
character of the NDB permits it to tap into the fortunes of other
rising stars within the Global South.

BRICS is only one cluster in a larger universe of emerging
economies with fast growth and investible surpluses. Columbia
University’s Emerging Market Global Players list has a total of
16 countries, i.e. 11 other ascending players apart from BRICS.
The NDB could invite these 11 to also become shareholders. The
idea of ‘BRICS plus’ (i.e. BRICS and other emerging
economies) could be nested in a formal institution to strengthen
a united front of developing countries disappointed with the
American-led Bretton Woods international financial institutions.

One key prerequisite for the Shanghai-headquartered NDB is a
coherent philosophy and character to set it apart from the World
Bank and its sister concerns. The latter promote lending with a
neoliberal view of advancing private market forces and downsizing
the role of the state in developing countries. On the other hand,
BRICS members are united on the question of protecting state
sovereignty and ensuring that governments retain a lead in
directing the economic strategies of their respective societies.

NDB must in word and deed oppose neoliberal ideology so that it
does not turn into a quantitative addition to the World Bank’s
lending power. It must strive to be a qualitatively different
animal that reflects the struggles and aspirations of the Global
South to break out of Western hegemony.

With China’s foreign aid budget alone exceeding that of the World
Bank, the ‘numero uno’ position of the Bretton Woods
institutions is already, in a sense, passé. But discomfort in
Africa and Latin America about China’s predominance as a
megalithic donor has increased of late. From the wary lenses of
least developed countries, NDB can be a safe alternative to
unilateral Chinese loans that come with strings attached like
captive energy deals. The world’s poor would prefer borrowing
from the NDB which reflects multiple interests than from a single
source that lengthens China’s shadows on their societies.

The Fortaleza BRICS summit will unveil a currency reserve pool
agreement worth $100 billion to help member countries absorb
economic shocks. This contingency fund has been dubbed by Russian
Finance Minister Anton Siluanov as a “mini-IMF” to act as a
buffer against panicky runs on currencies such as the ones that
occurred last year owing to a flight of US dollar-based
investors.

BRICS have learnt lessons the hard way that reliance on the US
Federal Reserve is a crippling dependence that is akin to being
held hostage by Washington’s economic priorities. The
“mini-IMF” is thus actually a vehicle for deliverance
from the IMF, which has been Washington’s financial instrument as
the sole rescuer during macroeconomic crises. BRICS are now
ushering in what could become an alternative helpline for
countries that are fiscally in the red.

Apart from the NDB and the currency swaps, which have been
subjects of fine-tuning among BRICS countries for years, the
Fortaleza summit will also be looked upon for guidance on the
critical question of energy security. Russia has proposed a new
BRICS Energy Association with a fuel reserve that can assure
continuous supply of oil and gas at predictable prices. Energy
cost volatility has been a central problem plaguing economic
growth in oil and gas importing nations such as India, China and
South Africa.

If a rules-based accord is reached at the BRICS level on energy
exporters, Russia and Brazil, aiding the energy importing member
countries, it will go a long way towards shielding the two Asian
giants from the turbulence of the global crude market and improve
their strategic autonomy.

The host nation of the latest summit, Brazil, has also proposed
an innovative new statistical platform with the BRICS imprint
that will provide an alternative to the mainstream methodology
adopted by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) to measure GDP, inflation, unemployment and
other macroeconomic indices. This statistical innovation could
enable BRICS to introduce nuances into the development paradigms
that have been designed by the Washington Consensus institutions
since World War II.

Brazil has also stressed that BRICS cannot be satisfied being a
merely economics-centered institution. The Brazilian ambassador
to India has mooted a “new architecture of international
politics” alongside economic advancements as the twin goals
of BRICS.

In the past, BRICS have shied away from joint diplomatic or
military action to overcome regional armed conflicts and
tensions. At Fortaleza, the world will be watching if BRICS can
formulate a mechanism that can go beyond their routine statements
or communiqués which condemn violence or intrusion into sovereign
nations’ internal affairs by interventionist Western powers.

As leaders of their respective regions or sub-regions, BRICS
countries could anoint local point persons for Africa, Latin
America and Asia and offer undiluted support to these designated
countries to douse wars, rebellions and other calamities
befalling their neighborhoods. For instance, if a situation like
the Islamist threat to Mali arises again, South Africa or Nigeria
should be the point person backed unequivocally by all BRICS
countries to be the decisive factor that paves the way to a
solution.

Likewise, the intractable crisis in Afghanistan might be tackled
by India and China if they form a troika with Russia and win the
consent of the other regional neighbors which are not sanguine
about what the Americans have done in the last twelve years.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has already floated a
proactive trial balloon along these lines by announcing that he
will brainstorm with BRICS counterparts at Fortaleza on how the
group can “contribute to international efforts to address
regional crises.”

With ingenuity, BRICS can forestall the culture of neocolonial
interference by the US and European powers in the guise of
firefighting in the Global South. Imagine what a sea change we
could witness in international security if there were, say, a
BRICS Peacekeeping Force that would work along with the UN and
regional organizations as an independent troubleshooting entity
which could deploy in select unstable parts of the world.

How refreshing would it be if there were BRICS diplomatic
missions, consisting of high level representatives of the five
nations, to go on fact-finding assignments, avert catastrophic
wars or invasions, and even broker peace between warring parties?
Hiding behind resource constraints and leaving the field to the
Americans and the Europeans as the sole peace brokers and
‘conflict managers’ is not a respectable option for
BRICS if it fancies itself as a motor for global leadership.
Surrendering to the West or riding piggyback on Western global
governance structures is a “status quo-ist” strategy
that does not behoove of the revisionist BRICS.

The Fortaleza summit can be a hopeful landmark for the
downtrodden across the world if it lays the foundation for
elevating the economic powerhouse of BRICS into a political tour
de force.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.